India’s Anti-Terror Troops Despise Their Assault Rifle

[COLDHEARTED AVIATOR]

BS article by someone who I doubt has fired a single round in his life.


Not true. It is outdated but all teething issues on the system have been resolved.

Oh,so when is the Army or CRPF or BSF ordering more guns?

The thing is most of us want to deny the fact that the gun is useless.

Which LMG in todays modern army doesnt use drum magazine or belts?..Indian Army and that is why you have RR using Brens and SF using PKM.

RR doesnt even touch INSAS and the same is true for SF..even the COBRA is not using INSAS which is a big statement.

 

[acetophenol]

Okay,What is the purpose of LMG?

I guess to suppress enemy fortification for which you need high rate of fire and hitting power which the INSAS LMG lacks.In today's age it is the only LMG which does not have a drum magazine or a belt.

INSAS has the problem of stopping in between a firefight not of maintenance only and if it falls its magazine breaks into two.

I don't know about your source but the Special Forces and the RR "does not" use INSAS...and that is a big statement.

Wrong mate,

The M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle used by USMC in the SAW role also uses 30 round Mags

 

[MilSpec]

Oh,so when is the Army or CRPF or BSF ordering more guns?

The thing is most of us want to deny the fact that the gun is useless.

Which LMG in todays modern army doesnt use drum magazine or belts?..Indian Army and that is why you have RR using Brens and SF using PKM.

RR doesnt even touch INSAS and the same is true for SF..even the COBRA is not using INSAS which is a big statement.

You can dig up all the insas posts on the forum and you might get better idea of the same.

Contingent deployment of Assault rifles are based on engagement range. Both 5.56 Nato and 7.62x 39 have inherent shortcomings and advantages. At the end of the day it comes down to right tool for the right job.

In 300 - 400 range engagement Insas shines, but if your engagement range is 100 yards, 7.62 terminal ballistics outshines any 5.56 platform.

As far as LMG variant of Insas is concerned, it is no different than the RPK and AK distinction, it uses a heavier receiver and bull barell, any weapon system that utilizes a box magazine can also accept a drum magazine, (Ak's, Fals, g3, Ar's) Even pistols can accept drum mags as long as someone builds one.

Insas LMG, like the RPK or RPD is a super light MG. Although Russian army uses PKM's and PKS even though they have the RPK systems. These LMG are suitable for mechanized infantry and mobile platoons.

 

[COLDHEARTED AVIATOR]

Wrong mate,

The M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle used by USMC in the SAW role also uses 30 round Mags

 

[acetophenol]

Oh,so when is the Army or CRPF or BSF ordering more guns?

The thing is most of us want to deny the fact that the gun is useless.

Which LMG in todays modern army doesnt use drum magazine or belts?..Indian Army and that is why you have RR using Brens and SF using PKM.

RR doesnt even touch INSAS and the same is true for SF..even the COBRA is not using INSAS which is a big statement.

We are seeing updated INSAS rifles in service in more IA units, which means they are still satisfied with the gun.

And I hope you don't need to be reminded of the preference given to 7.62mm rounds in CT and CI Ops.

INSAS is good standard issue rifle, to be issued to the large number of Indian soldiers. INSAS has been in use with our multiple services at very demanding environmental conditions .

 

[COLDHEARTED AVIATOR]

You can dig up all the insas posts on the forum and you might get better idea of the same.

Contingent deployment of Assault rifles are based on engagement range. Both 5.56 Nato and 7.62x 39 have inherent shortcomings and advantages. At the end of the day it comes down to right tool for the right job.

In 300 - 400 range engagement Insas shines, but if your engagement range is 100 yards, 7.62 terminal ballistics outshines any 5.56 platform.

As far as LMG variant of Insas is concerned, it is no different than the RPK and AK distinction, it uses a heavier receiver and bull barell, any weapon system that utilizes a box magazine can also accept a drum magazine, (Ak's, Fals, g3, Ar's) Even pistols can accept drum mags as long as someone builds one.

Insas LMG, like the RPK or RPD is a super light MG. Although Russian army uses PKM's and PKS even though they have the RPK systems. These LMG are suitable for mechanized infantry and mobile platoons.

Have you ever even touched the INSAS?or come remotely close to see someone firing it?

Oil spills,frequent breakdowns and poor build quality is not 5.56 vs 7.62 debate.

The Assault Rifle Insas didnt have a full auto mode..what kind of a assault rifle is that?And it is more expensive than an AK.

As far as the LMG is concerned it has the full auto mode but lacks hitting power and i have doubts on it suppressing enemy targets compared to PKM,Bren,SAW or the Pak Army MG 3

 

[skysthelimit]

Okay,What is the purpose of LMG?

I guess to suppress enemy fortification for which you need high rate of fire and hitting power which the INSAS LMG lacks.In today's age it is the only LMG which does not have a drum magazine or a belt.

INSAS, and many other NATO rifles, chose the 5.56 mm round because of a conscious design decision. A 5.56mm round will have less stopping power - but in a war environment wounding a soldier is better than killing him outright, cos a wounded soldier takes 2 others out of action who have to assist him. A dead soldier takes out only 1.

For dedicated CT purposes you need the more lethal 7.62mm rounds - cos a quick kill is absolutely crucial. And so the INSAS was never designed for a dedicated CT role. Yes the INSAS needed improvements - which were made long ago, but so did the M16 and AK for that matter.

And INSAS was adapted into the LMG role - so lacks some of the features of dedicated LMGs.What do you want - one gun to kill them all (i.e. one gun design for all roles)?

INSAS has the problem of stopping in between a firefight not of maintenance only and if it falls its magazine breaks into two.

Source?

 

[acetophenol]

If you are trying to highlight to me the advantage of continuous fire from LMGs, I am already aware of them. However kindly remember that both Mag and Belt fed LMGs have its own advantages as well as disadvantages.

It was IA's choice to have Mag fed LMGs, OFB has been making belt fed ammos for years. There was Box fed LMGs produced by OFB too, so it was IAs choice to have Mag fed LMGs instead of Belt fed ones. So don't blame INSAS for it

Box fed LMG from OFB @ Def Expo

Have you ever even touched the INSAS?or come remotely close to see someone firing it?

Oil spills,frequent breakdowns and poor build quality is not 5.56 vs 7.62 debate.

The Assault Rifle Insas didnt have a full auto mode..what kind of a assault rifle is that?And it is more expensive than an AK.

As far as the LMG is concerned it has the full auto mode but lacks hitting power and i have doubts on it suppressing enemy targets compared to PKM,Bren,SAW or the Pak Army MG 3

Again, variants of INSAS rifle with Automatic mode was also made by OFB, it was the Army's choice not to have them!

And about the oil spills, break down and poor quality things, please post some evidence. I know there were issues in the past, but from what I know, they have been cleared.

 

[COLDHEARTED AVIATOR]

We are seeing updated INSAS rifles in service in more IA units, which means they are still satisfied with the gun.

And I hope you don't need to be reminded of the preference given to 7.62mm rounds in CT and CI Ops.

INSAS is good standard issue rifle, to be issued to the large number of Indian soldiers. INSAS has been in use with our multiple services at very demanding environmental conditions .

INSAS, and many other NATO rifles, chose the 5.56 mm round because of a conscious design decision. A 5.56mm round will have less stopping power - but in a war environment wounding a soldier is better than killing him outright, cos a wounded soldier takes 2 others out of action who have to assist him. A dead soldier takes out only 1.

For dedicated CT purposes you need the more lethal 7.62mm rounds - cos a quick kill is absolutely crucial. And so the INSAS was never designed for a dedicated CT role. Yes the INSAS needed improvements - which were made long ago, but so did the M16 and AK for that matter.

And INSAS was adapted into the LMG role - so lacks some of the features of dedicated LMGs.What do you want - one gun to kill them all (i.e. one gun design for all roles)?



Source?

If CT is all about 5.56 vs 7.62 then why is TAVOR a hit with everyonme from the jungles of Chattisgarh to the valleys in Kashmir despite all of the units initially going for INSAS?

If you are trying to highlight to me the advantage of continuous fire from LMGs, I am already aware of them. However kindly remember that both Mag and Belt fed LMGs have its own advantages as well as disadvantages.

It was IA's choice to have Mag fed LMGs, OFB has been making belt fed ammos for years. There was Box fed LMGs produced by OFB too, so it was IAs choice to have Mag fed LMGs instead of Belt fed ones. So don't blame INSAS for it

Box fed LMG from OFB @ Def Expo




Again, variants of INSAS rifle with Automatic mode was also made by OFB, it was the Army's choice not to have them!

And about the oil spills, break down and poor quality things, please post some evidence. I know there were issues in the past, but from what I know, they have been cleared.

What evidence do you need?about the magazine breaking into 2 or oil spills and how can i give you evidence of that?You can go to DefExpo and ask them to drop the gun on the floor to see how good the magazine is.

My source is not ToI.I have had the privelage of firing INSAS and talking to soldiers about it.

 

[acetophenol]

If CT is all about 5.56 vs 7.62 then why is TAVOR a hit with everyonme from the jungles of Chattisgarh to the valleys in Kashmir despite all of the units initially going for INSAS?

TAVOUR, as you know is a bullpup rifle and holds the advantage of easy carrying, ergonomics and optics. And it costs a lot more than INSAS too. And in my knowledge, after AKs, INSAS is the next widely used weapon in CT Ops in Kashmir, Tavour was seen in the valley with the Paras, along with a few M4s

 

[COLDHEARTED AVIATOR]

TAVOUR, as you know is a bullpup rifle and holds the advantage of easy carrying, ergonomics and optics. And it costs a lot more than INSAS too. And in my knowledge, after AKs, INSAS is the next widely used weapon in CT Ops in Kashmir, Tavour was seen in the valley with the Paras, along with a few M4s

Look man,the newer INSAS is something which i cannot talk about but the issues were there till 2011.Most of the Infantry is equipped with older INSAS.The decision to import AR,LMG and carbines has already been taken.I dont see Army going back to the INSAS again.

 

[acetophenol]

If CT is all about 5.56 vs 7.62 then why is TAVOR a hit with everyonme from the jungles of Chattisgarh to the valleys in Kashmir despite all of the units initially going for INSAS?



What evidence do you need?about the magazine breaking into 2 or oil spills and how can i give you evidence of that?You can go to DefExpo and ask them to drop the gun on the floor to see how good the magazine is.

My source is not ToI.I have had the privelage of firing INSAS and talking to soldiers about it.

My friend, all of us will have their own sources or reasons to hate or love stuff. If you go other Indian forums such as Defence Forum India, there are members who are privileged to have first hand experiences with our armed forces, probably more than you, who are ardent supporters of INSAS. I hope you know them.

My points are simple,

INSAS is good general issue rifle. Its in service with IA,IAF,IN,BSF,CRPF and almost every other armed force in the country. It has gone through rigorous uses in the many years of its service.A poor quality rifle wouldn't have gone this far with our import friendly forces.

I am not saying INSAS is great rifle, but just a good one. One may point out the absence of Full auto fire or a belt fed ammo in LMGs as drawback, but remember it was IA's choice!

Look man,the newer INSAS is something which i cannot talk about but the issues were there till 2011.Most of the Infantry is equipped with older INSAS.The decision to import AR,LMG and carbines has already been taken.I dont see Army going back to the INSAS again.

IA is looking for INSAS replacements not because INSAS is a bad rifle, but because of the change in IA doctrines. IA's decisions to go for Multi-Cal rifles show this. Anyway, INSAS has served us for almost 20 years and its gonna stay with us for atleast 2017s. A "bad" rifle wouldn't have made this far!

Even my classmate at NDA said to me that INSAS is "not good" and makes a hole "very small" compared to SLR
If you look for it, you can find all sorts of complaints about all types of weapons. But most of the time it comes down to how a soldier looks after his rifle. You treat her well, she treats you well!

 

[COLDHEARTED AVIATOR]

My friend, all of us will have their own sources or reasons to hate or love stuff. If you go other Indian forums such as Defence Forum India, there are members who are privileged to have first hand experiences with our armed forces, probably more than you, who are ardent supporters of INSAS. I hope you know them.

My points are simple,

INSAS is good general issue rifle. Its in service with IA,IAF,IN,BSF,CRPF and almost every other armed force in the country. It has gone through rigorous uses in the many years of its service.A poor quality rifle wouldn't have gone this far with our import friendly forces.

I am not saying INSAS is great rifle, but just a good one. One may point out the absence of Full auto fire or a belt fed ammo in LMGs as drawback, but remember it was IA's choice!

I dont know whom you refer to but my interaction is with RR and the Infantry Ghataks/Commandos who are second only to Para.If they dont like something i trust them.

Probably you can ask them why the Infantry soldiers prefer Brens and AKs in RR and LOC deployments if they are in touch with the foot soldiers.

INSAS is a good rifle for Arty,Enginners,signals and other corps who wont actually fight a war.I think our foot soldiers deserve a better rifle and hence the IA is doing what it should have done long back.

Had the INSAS even been a decent rifle the IA wont be ordering AR,LMG and carbines from abroad.

 

[Koovie]

Insas is a adequate rifle now.. by no means a perfect one (Still too heavy for example), but it does its job.

 

[RescueRanger]

Correct me if I am wrong but is the INSAS based on a similar design to the Galil?